Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Will Tucker’s Access to J6 Video Make a Difference?
Speaker of the House Kevin McCarthy has granted exclusive access to producers from Tucker Carlson Tonight to review “all” of the January 6 video stored by the House. This is being touted as a bombshell event that will finally get at the truth of the January 6 event as a set-up by Progressive actors in Congress and the Deep State. But will it?
I don’t think so. And there are four reasons:
- It is not clear whether the producers will see all of the video, and even if they do there will be limits on broadcasting portions of the video if it is determined by Speaker McCarthy as revealing security measures that are deemed too sensitive for disclosure.
- Of necessity, the public will see video clips when and if they are broadcast, therefore, there can always be claims that the editing misrepresents what happened.
- Portions of the country will automatically believe that whatever Tucker says or claims is a lie; many of us who agree with Tucker directionally are aware that sometimes Tucker overclaims.
- Progressives (including their media allies) famously “project” that conservatives will do or are doing exactly what Progressives have done or would do. That is, if the Democrat January 6 Committee Report was a put-up job (and it was), so, too, it will be claimed, is Tucker’s report.
If video shows (and it does) that Capitol police officers held the door for the “paraders” was that because there was a plan to entrap the “paraders” or was it a reasonable response to the threat of a mob? Video will not resolve that question. Only testimony from individuals, recordings of communications traffic, and information that proves or refutes a government plan to foment and entrap, will change the Progressives preferred narrative. And enough Republicans bought into at least part of the narrative that there is personal political peril from having the narrative completely debunked. Speaker McCarthy is amongst them. This is a recipe for strategic ambiguity.
In other words, when Tucker’s series is through — whenever that is — we will all be pretty much where we were before Tucker’s producers got access. Even if or when other media get access, it will simply be “wash, rinse, repeat.”
I wish it were not so. But there it is.Published in General
I don’t believe any of them have owned up to their perfidy in pushing these lies, either. They just moved on to a new lie. There have been no consequences. Did that jerk at NRO who said the Covington boys had “spit on the cross” ever apologize for getting it so wrong?
Presumably that would not add to the January 6th arrests because the FBI has already seen and vetted all the video. There was one prominent case of a family turning in their own father/husband, but that was because he was threatening and abusive toward them. I don’t know about any other cases like that.
But most of those stories are no longer believed by a majority of people. The dishonest media narratives lasted only so long.
But there are lefty groups that have dedicated themselves to trying to identify people in these videos and are tipping off the FBI. That’s what I mean about not giving these people more video so that they can play brave stoolies for their leftist masters.
And for some reason, there are a lot of people who are on video breaking windows, opening doors, encouraging people to go into the building, and even planting pipe bombs that the FBI simply isn’t interested in.
Indeed, I just read this morning . . .
and . . .
Good point. But I guess this has to balanced against the possibility of never releasing that video. I’m still for the idea of transparency, even if it has drawbacks. The alternative is secrecy, which doesn’t sound decent or even American.
First of all, I note upfront how very much I want to disagree with you and to feel, against all the arguments you have marshalled so well, that the tapes will make a difference. It is my deep hope that, even with all these hurdles, the public will finally see enough to know, once and for all, that this entire narrative, and the Committee which “investigated” it, are all pure frauds on the public. As to your first point, it seems now to be crystal clear that the producers will not see all of the video, despite all the hopeful fanfare when the news first came out. On his show last night, Tucker said we would start seeing some of the video next week; as Tucker is, for us here in our home, at least, “the only show in town”, and we all know the networks will studiously ignore the whole matter, I can only hope that we see at least some representative portions about the most controversial parts of the afternoon of Jan 6. That’s all we have.
I, sadly, agree with every jot and tittle of your 3 points above, all of which, in my estimation, result from what is commonly called the polarization of our society, but is further inflamed by the fact that the public’s distrust of institutions -and the people who “lead” them- has probably never been at a higher level in this country than at the present time. All we can do is hope there are enough fair minded people on the other side of the spectrum who will, perhaps even grudgingly, finally admit that they were, at least to some degree, wrong about what they heretofore have ridiculously called an insurrection. Based on some of the views I see expressed here on Ricochet, and elsewhere, I am compelled to share your pessimism about that ever happening; all I can do is hope it will.
The best impact use would be to compare the behavior on video to the sentencing. Innocuous “parading” through an open door, a friendly chat with a cop, then an exit when ordered yet still getting a sentence longer than ones typically issued to thugs guilty of gun-related crime in Chicago….
The MSM can counter with the ugly shoving in the hallway, the offensive grabbing of podia and the timeless weirdness of the blue buffalo guy as the defining moments.
We already have a picture of Ray Epps chatting with a guy who was seen at several Antifa riots which some have offered as evidence of fellow government plants in conversation. Will there be other figures who were previously seen among leftists rioters? Will anyone be recognized outright as a fed? Of those who first pushed their way in, how many remain unidentified, and is that still suspicious given the level of detail the FBI applied to phone records, face recognition etc.?
I can’t fathom the logistics of wading through all of that in some detailed fashion.
I knew a retired cop who worked for the law firm as an investigator and paralegal. He could steadily scan a few thousand pdfs and notice differences in docs that nobody else could–e.g., multiple copies of a number of corporate cell phone bills mixed with other docs but he still noticed that one number had been whited out on one copy of the bill but not another a few hundred pages back and broke open the entire case from that one clue. There are probably not enough available guys like that to view all that video.
Of course not. They just pulled the post and went about their business.
Being a sanctimonious jerk means never saying you are sorry.
I doubt the good will of the government (DOJ, FBI, everyone). This sounds similar to a perjury trap: you confess 98% of everything you did, where you went what you touched, and the FBI finds one thing that you did that you forgot or didn’t know you did, and they void the pardon and prosecute you for what you confessed.
Fair point. My focus was on giving a reason for government employees and informants to come forward. But, yes, I take your point.
My Golly. What’s with this thread!? Much of the commentary seems to be, “No matter what we do, we’re gonna lose.” This is the attitude of the successfully bullied.
Let’s get the truth out there! Release the freakin’ videos! The truth stands a much better chance of winning if it’s actually heard (or seen.)
I like the idea that Tucker Carlson will get them first. The left already had its chance to cherry-pick and manipulate them. This will give our side a chance to be heard. And no, I don’t support dishonest cherry-picking. Just show the most important videos first.
Once Carlson has released his TV specials and the media start to react and lie about them, all of the videos need to be released and placed on the Internet. Remember how Dan Rather got caught?
No, it wont matter as far as the public opinion wars go.
BUT it might make a difference to the defendants still being held, if they could be tracked and be shown to have done nothing wrong – security opened the doors and let them in… Its not trespassing if they had a reasonable expectation that they were invited or permitted into a public building…
Isnt so much of US Law based on Reasonable Expectations?
It was mentioned in an earlier comment that some 2,000 people entered the Capitol. However, only a few more than 1,000 have been prosecuted. Every person who has been arrested has public records that are easily available at https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases. I’ve spent hours reviewing these records. I have not found a single defendant who is being held who simply walked through an open door. Indeed, I have not found a single defendant who has been charged who simply walked through an open door. There has always been an additional criminal act. If you know of a single defendant who is still being held, or charged, who only walked through an open door, please name him or her, and let’s both look that defendant up.
Most of the defendants who have not yet been tried are free on their own recognizance. It appears that only some 10-15% are being held in pretrial detention. Again, in each case where they are being held in pretrial detention, there is a detailed affidavit of why they are being held, and a Court’s finding of dangerousness. So, if you know of a specific person who is being wrongfully held, please name him or her, and let’s look that defendant up.
I don’t object in theory to the large majority of tapes being released. I do object to them going only to one journalist. I suggest that they be released to a large number of journalists, say those who have a seat at the White House Press Briefing Room which numbers 49 seats. See https://factba.se/white-house-seating-chart. This would include such conservative outlets such as Newsmax, the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, the Washington Times, The Daily Caller, and the Salem Network.
More than half were prosecuted?!
Drew, if you will look at the database at https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/capitol-breach-cases, you will see that the people who were prosecuted not only entered the Capitol, but committed criminal acts. Here is my challenge to you. Look at the database, and select a defendant who you believe is being persecuted. We can both discuss that specific defendant.
There is also a database of sentences handed down at https://www.justice.gov/file/1567746/download. It looks like it has about 400 sentences listed. My very rough analysis is that half of the sentences did not involve incarceration, but only community service, a term of probation and a $500 restitution order. But, look for yourself. If you find a miscarriage of justice, please name that defendant, and we can discuss him or her.
@garyrobbins, you are publishing facts, i.e. recorded convictions. But for many of us it appears that there has been massive abuse of process motivated by a world view that “Orange Man Bad” and anyone who voted for him is beneath contempt. Couple with that that people have been removed from their homes around the country and put into a system in DC where having a Trump sign in your yard is considered evidence of treason, with public defenders who “swim” in the DC culture focused on “cutting a deal” and not challenging the process. Those of us who see this situation in the way I described are not impressed at all by the record of convictions, and do not see this as a great victory for justice and democracy. More and more Americans are coming to the view that something sketchy was going on in DC on January 6 that was focused on the Trump supporters but was not organic to the Trump supporters. You are entitled to your opinion, and I do not dispute the fact of conviction. But that doesn’t mean it was deserved in all the cases, or even many of the cases. If what happened to Antifa around the country is a measure, then only a handful of J6 “rioters” would be in jail. If that doesn’t give you pause about the J6 trials, nothing will.
In my hours of reading affidavits from the database, I do not recall a single case where having a Trump sign in your yard is a sign of treason. If you have such a case, please let me know, and we can look it up together.
Plenty of defendants have gone to trial. There has been only one acquittal. Everyone else was convicted. The Defendants could have a trial by jury, or have a trial before the Judge, a number of whom were appointed by Republican Presidents.
I absolutely would support vigorous prosecution of Antifa defendants.
@garyrobbins, reread the quote and you will see I am referring to an attitude and bias and not specific cases.
Beyond that, I think I have expressed myself enough. You disagree. I get it.
That’s fair. Thanks.
The DOJ database is hardly an objective source. The issue is whether the charges were over-the-top. That is not resolved, Gary, by looking at the list of crimes and saying, see, it was all as it should be.
I am like totally shocked that a DOJ doc would not list instances of people freely admitted to the building being charged. That absence must settle the matter, right?
If it had really been an organized insurrection, some leaders would have been identified, punished hard and followers less so or not at all. [The rank and file in the entire Confederate Army was automatically pardoned by Lincoln. Officers and rich civilians ($20,000+ net worth) had to apply for a pardon. Those guys also did a lot of “parading” on federal property and did so armed.]
This was a demonstration that got out of hand because in a city where the police have the resources and extensive experience in crowd control and instead an unaided small, badly led, partisan-directed security force screwed the pooch.
I have no sympathy for the sheer stupidity of this fiasco. But I also deeply resent the lies about how it was ordered, encouraged and directed by Trump which lie about “insurrection” supposedly justified a partisan prosecutorial beatdown. Exaggerating the nature and seriousness was intentional not just for immediate partisan advantage but to justify silencing and legally harassing the right in an ongoing abuse of power. Every utterance from the right, every criticism of Biden could be censored as dangerous insurrection
Gary, which of those listed cases involved the charges against the guy charged with injuring a cop’s shoulder by yanking down his shield? You know, the cop caught lying when it turned out there was complete video evidence of the alleged event? Did that cop still get disability for that “injury” and did his pending book deal go through? I wish I could remember the name of the razor sharp young female African-American defense attorney that handled that. That case alone should terrify the DOJ that all the video will be available to defense attorneys who should have had it before.
when, exactly, has the left been punished in the last 50 years for any sandal of any sort?
If you can find someone who has been prosecuted who is not in the database, you would have a huge expose, and should immediately take it to FNC ot Newsmax who would make a huge big deal out of it.
If you can find someone who entered the Capitol peacefully and left peacefully and was prosecuted, I would be interested in that person’s name so I can check it out.
“Parading” doesn’t require violence. 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(G) says nothing about violence — it does also say picketing and protest. I don’t know the individual facts in any of the following, but here are some cases where the conviction was solely on 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(G)
This is what I found in 30 seconds from the DOJ Capitol Breach case website. There may be more.
How are you determining that?
It seems that much is still sealed.
Below, I identify my third random pick from the list. The first random pick had an allegation of assaulting an officer (although it seems to have been by a codefendant) so I stopped reading. The second random pick had a photo of the defendant and he, she or zee, seemed guilty of something so I stopped reading.
The third one is:
Only charges seem to be presence and conclusory assertion of disorderly conduct. Statement of facts suggests defendant as organizing a bus convoy from MA
I looked up the first dozen cases a few weeks ago when Gary linked to the database before. I read the specific charges against each one and their circumstances. I found that in just the first dozen there were several that were accused of just walking into the Capital building and doing nothing nefarious thereafter. However, their charges included not just “parading” but things like impeding a Congressional proceeding (or something like that) and several others that were derived from simply walking in. It was obvious that the prosecutors were simply “piling on” as many charges as they could get away with to see how many could stick. So Gary is completely wrong that nobody was prosecuted for simply “walking in.” He might be deluding himself about that by only reading the official charges and not reading the descriptive narratives written by FBI officials that go along with each criminal act.
259 people have been convicted under 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(G). Of that number all but 17 had that as the single and sole count of their conviction. 85% of those convicted were convicted of that charge alone. Have there been 242 Antifa protesters convicted of anything?
The first requirement of the law is equal justice. No legal system that routinely treats their citizens in an unequal basis for the same or similar conduct is countenanced by our Constitution. The oath of law enforcement officials within the DOJ is clearly being violated. As an officer of the court, you need to take a long look at yourself and ask whether the system you serve has become corrupted.
The Twitter files were only released to selected journalists first, is that a problem?
IF you release it to everyone – nobody will do a story on it – because they have no opportunity for an exclusive scoop. They dont have any information that anyone else has. This is particularly true for stories that the media wants to bury.
Found another 23 convictions solely on 40 U.S.C. § 5104(e)(2)(G) that my original search term didn’t highlight. That is 265 individuals convicted of parading, picketing or protesting presumably without violence or they would have been convicted of assault, criminal damage, and obstruction of an official proceeding.
Everyone can check it out at https://www.justice.gov/file/1567746/download. I may have missed some stuff.